In one week, I went from Top 50 gold where I was stuck to top 8 platinum. braveZOMBiE.532

My win rate against Terran is like 90%. Now that I've figured out how to hold the initial bunker rush, it's more like 100%.

I just remember being stuck in Gold and then winning like 15 straight vs gold, platinum and eventually diamond.

If your ZvT could use some work, this guide ROCKS.

Bunker rushes require you to pull drones from your main and occasionally produce a couple extra zerglings and 1-2 spines. After you hold it, though, you can transition into the roach/ling timing to contain him to 1 base.

On January 27 2012 11:23 XChoke wrote:I don't understand why people have some hate against the OP because of his stylistic choice of play. I personal play a similar style using an intial army to contain while gaining map control. Yes Banshee's/drops are quite a common response but it's so predictable that you just get those extra queens and a spine crawler or two a little earlier...

Why do so many Zergs think that any build that doesn't optimize economy is "all in"? Tell that Leenock! I believe the OP is actually advocating quite a balanced play style that contains/pressures the opponent while he safely macro's behind it. How is this not a good transition or any less valid than droning to 70+?

I agree XChoke, I think there's a double-standard in StarCraft where Terran and Protoss players are expected to do pressure builds but if a Zerg player tries to pressure it's suddenly cheese. I hope more people open up to the variety of strategies in SC2!

Imagine a Terran or Protoss player pulls 10-15 workers with every pressure build that they do. That's usually around the number of drones you're cutting with your builds on every offensive, and that's why they're all-ins.

If your builds were built around keeping an equivalent economy with your opponent, then you might be able to call it pressure. But there is no double-standard - If Terran and Protoss cut worker production, or pull workers, then they're doing an all-in. It would be a double-standard not to say the same about Zerg.

On January 27 2012 11:23 XChoke wrote:I don't understand why people have some hate against the OP because of his stylistic choice of play. I personal play a similar style using an intial army to contain while gaining map control. Yes Banshee's/drops are quite a common response but it's so predictable that you just get those extra queens and a spine crawler or two a little earlier...

Why do so many Zergs think that any build that doesn't optimize economy is "all in"? Tell that Leenock! I believe the OP is actually advocating quite a balanced play style that contains/pressures the opponent while he safely macro's behind it. How is this not a good transition or any less valid than droning to 70+?

I agree XChoke, I think there's a double-standard in StarCraft where Terran and Protoss players are expected to do pressure builds but if a Zerg player tries to pressure it's suddenly cheese. I hope more people open up to the variety of strategies in SC2!

Imagine a Terran or Protoss player pulls 10-15 workers with every pressure build that they do. That's usually around the number of drones you're cutting with your builds on every offensive, and that's why they're all-ins.

If your builds were built around keeping an equivalent economy with your opponent, then you might be able to call it pressure. But there is no double-standard - If Terran and Protoss cut worker production, or pull workers, then they're doing an all-in. It would be a double-standard not to say the same about Zerg.

I like that you're analyzing it critically! But I would disagree with a few points.

First, you cannot compare executing a timing attack that uses 15 larva with protoss/terran players pulling 10/15 workers. Using workers as part of a timing attack immediately cuts your income in half! Not to mention lost mining time of moving across the map. With a roach/ling timing you're droning into the mid game, securing one fully-saturated base and an expansion with a few drones (it takes roughly 22-26 drones to be able to support 2hatch/2queen drone production).

I understand that you see StarCraft II as a game that revolves around "keeping an equivalent economy with your opponent". Many people would agree with you, and I think your answer is partically right: maintaining equal or greater economy with your opponent is a significant factor and it's one way to approach your decision-making. But you have to take into consideration other factors too, like map control and safety to drone, scouting information, damage done to opponent, and additional defenses built by opponent.

There are a wide variety of economic and aggressive transitions available to those who properly execute Roach/Ling timing attacks.

This build is Very much NOT an all-in. It can be used that way, or u could just go for a macro game. And also I'm sick of these double standard for zerg players, Protoss/Terran do early timing attacks and its stratgey, Zerg does an early timing attack and its Just cheese. Tang's guides are very useful for learning. Just because u can opt to do an all-in doesn't mean its an All-in.

On March 31 2012 04:29 Proxee wrote:This build is Very much NOT an all-in. It can be used that way, or u could just go for a macro game. And also I'm sick of these double standard for zerg players, Protoss/Terran do early timing attacks and its stratgey, Zerg does an early timing attack and its Just cheese. Tang's guides are very useful for learning. Just because u can opt to do an all-in doesn't mean its an All-in.

I agree with you about double standards, people overestimate how badly zerg needs 60+ drones and 3 fully saturated bases. Of course going for as strong of an economy and unit composition in the late game is a great strategy/mindset, but it's not the only one - There are a lot of ways to be dangerous in the early/midgame.

Aggressive builds are a critical part of the game. They're annoying when you're starting out, but in higher level play they're necessary to punish greedy builds and to keep your opponent guessing. I don't understand the hate Tang gets for pushing this style. It's as though macro play is the only acceptable form of SC2. I find it illuminating to compare this thread to the thread about foreigner vs. Korean play styles, and the aggression favored by the latter.

Now, if Tang actually paid people to drop or used fake accounts, that's another thing, but for now I'll take his word that he didn't.

On April 23 2012 10:13 Glitch890 wrote:I also find it interesting that when P or T (especially T) plays aggressively, no one bats an eye, but when Zerg does it all of a sudden your a cheesy noob.

It has been that way since beta I'm afraid, but I've seen so many pros (Nestea/Losira/Drg) go for 2base timings and transition into 3-4 base standard macro. The thing that bothers me the most is that people even criticize players for choosing all-in styles, they can be as effective as any.

seriously this is sooo risky. there are plenty of buildorders which will just CRUSH yours. maybe against most builds of the terran you will have a huge advantage after your push... but its a strategy game, so be able to react to everything without getting too much of a disadvantage...

Hi all, not sure if this question has been asked already so forgive me if it has:- Is there a reason for the slight difference in this BO compared to the original Tang thread on the ZvT Roach all-in or is it? In Phase 1 in this one, you build lings up to 60/60 supply, but in the other thread you only build lings up to 52/60 supply.- The basic BO in Step 1 does not seem to mention drone scouting - at what point should I send my drone out? I prefer 9 normally so I can get inside the terran wall-off to scout gas or not.

On April 23 2012 10:13 Glitch890 wrote:I also find it interesting that when P or T (especially T) plays aggressively, no one bats an eye, but when Zerg does it all of a sudden your a cheesy noob.

It has been that way since beta I'm afraid, but I've seen so many pros (Nestea/Losira/Drg) go for 2base timings and transition into 3-4 base standard macro. The thing that bothers me the most is that people even criticize players for choosing all-in styles, they can be as effective as any.

The difference is that they are actually good at the game where as your game is lacking past the 10 minute mark.

the question is, are the units going to worth all the investment? I can see it taking down hellions, map control but how about dealing damages? (maybe getting some depots down or a few marines + scv pull?)that's really my main and only concern, probably the one guide from Tang that I might do because it looks more macro based and easier to transition.